Britain's second city is under the control of a Tory-Liberal Democrat coalition – the so-called "progressive partnership". It is anything but progressive. We have much to learn from the way that a genuine progressive majority united to lead London under Ken Livingstone's mayoralty.

Birmingham and London are grappling with similar problems. But there are important differences in the way we have responded to them.

Birmingham has its problems of inequality – in employment, incomes, housing conditions and infant mortality rates (the worst in the UK). Research shows, though, that London and Birmingham are remarkably similar in the degree of inequality (7th and 8th worst, respectively).

The difference lies in the willingness to challenge the orthodoxy that wealth "trickles down" to the poor. Central government has clawed back too many powers from local government. But Livingstone's progressive London at least tried to use every lever available to it to shift the balance; from the campaign for a living wage to the focusing of transport and housing investment where it would most benefit poorer Londoners. There is much we can learn from this imagination and determination.

About a third of the populations of both London and Birmingham are from black and minority ethnic communities. But if the events of the past few days are anything to go by, we have an awful lot to learn from progressive London when it comes to making a strength of this multicultural diversity.

On Saturday, more than 5,000 people marched through Birmingham city centre in a show of solidarity with the people of Gaza. The majority were Muslims, but our protest united people from across the religious and political spectrum.

If our city leaders had got their way, the demonstration would never have taken place. With days to go, in the full knowledge that thousands of people would gather in the city centre, permission to march was withdrawn. In an astonishing series of events, the West Midlands Police were forced to invoke emergency powers to permit the demonstration. They were far more sensitive than our "progressive partnership" to the threat that a ban posed to community cohesion.

The march passed off peacefully. Senior police officers told us it was the "best stewarded demonstration" they could remember. I did not think I would be in a position where the police were the guarantors of our democratic rights against elected politicians who sought to deny us those rights, but that was the reality.

What conclusions can we draw? Yes, the issue at stake was contentious. But that is why people demonstrate in the first place. And yes, the Tory party were shaken by the fact that representatives of all four parties on the council signed my Issue of the Day statement demanding a council boycott of Israeli goods. But it is very hard to ignore the unspoken message that we should know our place, and that our place is not in the heart of our city.

I got a taste of that at my very first council meeting, when I asked why none of the 22 cabinet members or committee chairs were from our African-Caribbean or Asian communities. The council leader angrily told me to go back to Oldham – a rather confused reference to the BNP.

If there is something that defined progressive London, and will define it in the future, it is its openness to the city's diversity in all its many shades. It is also the critical importance of having political leaders who are not afraid to speak out on issues that can and must concern an international city. It is a lesson Birmingham's leaders need to take on board.

Salma Yaqoob will take part in a discussion about Gaza and justice in the Middle East at the Progressive London conference on 24 January 2009